XP ORX as a second of primary detector to a Garret AT Max

[Travel240z]

I have been running a Garrett AT Pro which I still have and now my primary is a Garrett AT Max. I like both machines. The Pro got me addicted to metal detecting and the Max required a bit of getting used to but it works really good for me now. I am thinking about selling the Pro as it does not get used much.

Here is what I have been thinking. Originally I was going to pick up an Equinox 800 but I hear it requires a learning curve that I am not sure I want to overcome at this time. My kids are just getting to teenage years and I only get a couple hours a week to metal detect. Therefore, I started looking at the XP ORX. It seems simple enough, I like that it is light, seems to have decent depth. Would this replace my AT Max or would it just be for different hunting? Again, I like my AT Max and am not sure if an XP ORX would be just another metal detector sitting in the house.

Note: I generally hunt on land and a little of chest wading in fresh water. Once a year I head to an ocean with the family on vacation. Generally at least one metal detector comes with me!

Let me know your thoughts.

 

[angelito1]

Welcome to Tnet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

[RustyGold]

Welcome to TreasureNet!
I like the XP ORX. It’s a good little, lightweight detector but I love my XP Deus even more.

 

[Irishgoldhound]

I just bought an Orx last spring. I also have an AT Pro that I’ve had for 10 yrs now. I was originally going to purchase the Equinox as well but after much researching I went with the Orx. I chose the Orx over the Equinox for many reasons which are: lighter, faster ( not by much), removable compact remote, 5 yr warranty, also there were no known issues with the detector like the Equinox’s many flaws. I bought the water kit with my detector and water hunted all summer with it and absolutely no problems with any leaking. My opinion on the Orx is, it puts my AT pro to bed. Beaches where I’ve hunted with my AT pro I was pulling out old 70’s pull tabs that were easy 15” plus and this is with the 9” HF coil. My AT pro obviously missed these and could not sniff out a tab that deep even with the stock coil. The detector hits fast and hard on gold rings and very sensitive. I found a 6gram 14k white gold with diamonds in the water and it slammed fast and hard on it. I also found a very small 0.5 gram 10k gold child’s ring that it also hammered on. Compared to the AT series I think it blows them away. Although I’ve never owned an AT max and the reason I never bought one was people didn’t like the sounds. I also heard it wasn’t much deeper than the Pro anyway. I can swing the Orx all day and hunt in and out of the water with no fatigue whatsoever to my wrist, shoulder or arm. It’s such a pleasure to swing. One day I still would like to get an Equinox but for now my XP is my love.

 

[Irishgoldhound]

...also check out some of Calabash’s videos. He shows the Orx hitting a dime at 14” no problem.

 

[Travel240z]

Thanks for the responses!

Irishgoldhound’s response was exactly why I am looking at the XP ORX. I think this will be my next detector. I also would be getting the underwater kit. I was concerned that the videos online were exaggerated on depth. Not used to a 9” coil getting those depths. I also like the higher frequency for the smaller gold searches.

The AT Max will get VDI readings on zero mode about 1.5” to 2” deeper than the AT Pro. If you have sound only on the AT Max due to depth, you can then switch to all metal and get an extra 1.5 to 2” deeper with VDI readings. Therefore, about 3 to 4” deeper total if you work the machine.

 

[SG CT]

I purchased the ORX a few months ago, and also very happy with it. To get an idea of its features, suggest you download the XP ORX User Manual from the XP Americas website.